Attributes, behaviors, or experiences? Lessons from research on trauma regarding gender differences

Abstract

Lessons from research on trauma I developed in the mid-1990s, and then taught to undergraduates for some years, a psychology of gender course. I quickly discovered that I had to deal with a substantial number of students entering the course firmly believing that men and women are very different. Some of these students were invested in this perspective and resistant to information that contradicted their beliefs. This Men-are-from-Mars-and-Women-are-from-Venus perspective continues to have a toehold in our society. In fact, though, the empirical basis for the essentialism and polarization based on gender is very weak when it comes to psychological attributes such as intuitiveness, sexual desire, scientific ability, or emotional strength. While these and other attributes may vary across individuals, the distribution of that variation tends to reveal very small, nonsignificant mean attribute differences between men and women (Hyde, 2005). While individuals tend not to differ so much due to gender on attributes, research on trauma exposure has made it clear that gender can be a powerful risk factor when it comes to the probability of experiencing specific types of trauma exposure (Goldberg & Freyd, 2006). Research has documented that violence and abuse trauma are not randomly distributed. For example, women are at higher risk of being sexually assaulted, and they are at higher risk than men of experiencing betrayal traumas. Interpersonal and complex trauma can be experienced by anyone, but the risk of having certain types of experiences is raised or lowered by various variables related to societal power and inequity, including socioeconomic status and gender (Brown, 2008; DePrince & Freyd, 2002; Klest, Freyd, & Foynes, 2013). Trauma research raises awareness of differences in rates of experience. It is not only trauma exposure rates that vary by gender: men and women have different risk rates for a host of other experiences from pay inequity to being interrupted when speaking. While this is well documented by systematic research (for gender and also race, age, and so on), it is often denied in society, even within research communities. It is not rare to be told that gender (or race, etc.

Betrayal Trauma and Gender: An Examination of the Victim–Offender Overlap

“…These results coincide with the previous literature surrounding the exploratory role of gender in assessments of BTT. More specifically, betrayal trauma literature has suggested that the strength and level of trust within varying relationships will vary for males and females (Freyd et al, 2007; Goldberg & Freyd, 2006) and that females are more susceptible to victimization defined by higher betrayal, such as sexual abuse and abuse in the home (Cuevas et al, 2007; Freyd, 2017). This gendered pattern of exposure may correspond to patterns of psychological, emotional, and behavioral outcomes (Becker-Blease & Freyd, 2005; DePrince & Freyd, 2002).…”

“…This study adds to the extant literature by making it clear that gender can be a powerful risk factor when it comes to the likelihood of experiencing certain types of trauma exposure and their corresponding outcomes. Previous research has documented that violence and abuse-related trauma are not randomly distributed, but rather are closely linked to variables related to societal power, including gender (DePrince & Freyd, 2002; Freyd, 2017; Howell, 2003). Furthermore, this reflection of gendered socialization may explain the gendered experiences in psychological and behavioral outcomes, including the increased likelihood of aggressive or violent behavior.…”

“…This increases their vulnerability to the negative effects of maltreatment and abuse in the home. In fact, research suggests that girls are more prone to abuse by family members or high betrayal trauma, such as sexual abuse (Cuevas et al, 2007; Freyd, 2017), while boys are more likely to fall victim to nonfamilial individuals or low or nonbetrayal trauma (Becker-Blease & Freyd, 2005).…”